We performed a comparison between ReadyAPI Test and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution offers excellent integration capabilities."
"Using SoapUI's automation suites to run all our test cases saved us a lot of time. Running 300 test cases takes about three to four days. When you automate all that, it takes only two to three hours."
"API mockups, functional testing, and load testing are valuable features."
"The product allows us to uncover any potential issues early on."
"ReadyAPI has the power to enrich all the technical work. You can achieve any complex task using ReadyAPI. I can also do UI automation with ReadyAPI. In a few test cases, we want to check the API and the equivalent UI. I download a job and write a piece of Groovy or Java code. It's almost the same in ReadyAPI. I can do that in a single test case. ReadyAPI is a powerful tool because you can do anything you want, but only you need to download the right set of jobs and produce the right set of code."
"SoapUI is uncomplicated and user-friendly."
"The most valuable features are that it is user-friendly, it's easy to use and easy to teach to others."
"One good feature is SoapUI's URL check, which allows you to check among the applications. I'm not just talking about the ones for Android. It has all kinds of multi-world tests that are really helpful."
"It allows us to test both desktop and web applications."
"In TestComplete, I saw a conformed package of a tool that kept everybody in consistency. The team was able to regenerate further tests without having to manipulate more code because the record feature is great."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"When compared to other tools, it is very simple."
"The database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."
"Customer service and technical support responsiveness are high. Everyone is very professional."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"SoapUI Pro could improve by having dashboards."
"The documentation needs to be improved because the interface is not easy for a first-time user."
"We tried automation but it's not easy to integrate with the synching and some of the mission tools that we use for automated testing of APIs."
"Could integrate the graphing module for load testing."
"There aren't any plugins for UI automation. You need to make a custom code and download a job to put into the libraries. If it were panelized, then it would be straightforward. It should be in a panel of the tools, so you can add those tools as your test step in your test cases."
"Stability has been an issue for us. It needs to be looked at and made a bit better."
"Occasionally, when you are saving, the solution can hang."
"SoapUI would benefit from some more customization abilities. It's a good interface, but it would be nice if they added the ability to build custom dashboards where the user can do their own bar graphs and pie charts."
"The test object repository needs to be improved. The hierarchy and the way we identify the objects in different applications, irrespective of technology, needs adjustments. The located and test objects are not as flexible compared to other commercial tools."
"During the distribution of our regression test cases, the control IDs are not always recognized correctly."
"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
"Headless testing would be a big improvement."
"What is currently missing from this solution is better support for mobile testing."
"Name Mapping feature should be clearer. Whenever I use it, I do not really know what will work and what will not work."
"The pricing is the constraint."
"The solution needs to extend the possibilities so that we can test on other operating systems, platforms and publications for Android as well as iOS."
ReadyAPI Test is ranked 15th in Functional Testing Tools with 31 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 10th in Functional Testing Tools with 72 reviews. ReadyAPI Test is rated 8.0, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of ReadyAPI Test writes "You can achieve any complex task with this tool". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". ReadyAPI Test is most compared with Postman, Broadcom Service Virtualization, ReadyAPI, Tricentis Tosca and Apigee, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish. See our ReadyAPI Test vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
